Three adverts have been banned after failing to disclose professional links with celebrity Steven Bartlett.
Online adverts for meal-replacement company Huel and personal nutrition business Zoe have been banned by the UK’s advertising watchdog, the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA).
The ASA has banned two paid-for Facebook adverts for Huel and one for Zoe, all of which featured Steven Bartlett, who is an investor in Zoe and a director at Huel. The adverts were visible in February and March 2024.
The ASA ruled that neither company disclosed their professional links with Bartlett in the adverts, misleading consumers into believing that the views expressed were independent, according to the agency.
One of the two banned adverts for Huel featured Bartlett pictured drinking one of their products alongside a quote stating: “This is Huel’s best product.”
In the second advert, he was seen in a video saying: “This is the best product that Huel have released.”
The complainants, who were aware that Bartlett was a director at Huel, challenged “whether the omission of his commercial interest in the company from the ads was misleading,” according to the ASA.
Huel’s response argued that Bartlett was “a well-known celebrity” and that when “celebrities endorsed products, consumers generally understood they did so in the context of a commercial relationship with the company behind the product.”
The nutrition company added: “Consumers had no doubt about the existence of such commercial relationships when they saw the endorsement within a paid-for ad taken out by a company.
“This expectation then removed the need for the commercial relationship to be explicitly stated, and that this was the case regardless of the exact nature of the relationship.”
Nevertheless, the advertising watchdog still deemed the two Facebook adverts as “likely to mislead” consumers.
Meanwhile, in the advert for Zoe, Bartlett is pictured with a patch on his arm alongside a quote stating: “If you haven’t tried Zoe yet, give it a shot. It might just change your life.”
Zoe’s response was similar to that of Huel, asserting that Bartlett’s celebrity status was crucial and that the “post was obviously identifiable as an ad” due to the ‘Sponsored’ label.
Food Magazine asked Zoe for comment on the decision to ban the adverts.
A spokesperson said: “Neither the Code nor any of the ASA’s guidance suggests that it is necessary to go into granular detail about the precise nature of an ambassador’s commercial relationship with a brand. We believe the ad was compliant with the Cap Code.
“We respect the ASA’s work in upholding transparency in online advertising and have provided a written assurance that it will not appear again in that form. We would welcome further guidance to bring clarity on the effect of this decision, to ensure that all our future advertising complies with the Cap Code.”
Huel could not be immediately reached for comment.
Last year, the ASA banned two other Huel adverts on Facebook for making unsupported health and finance-related claims. The agency noted that paid social media advertising from Huel claimed its meal replacement shakes were cheaper and healthier than a traditional diet.
One month later, Huel removed an advert targeting students on TikTok that emphasised the affordability of their products.